Install Theme

Your web-browser is very outdated, and as such, this website may not display properly. Please consider upgrading to a modern, faster and more secure browser. Click here to do so.

Well now, this is awkward

Holy fuck what is this. A freaky midget with a fucked up body? What's its name? Jae? What's it blog? Fandom, random humour, and Angry Feminist posts? I do believe so. Hello Tumblr. Goodbye Tumblr.
Apr 18 '14

hippity-hoppity-brigade:

aa-noms-you:

pursuingthemeaning:

do not fall in love with people like me.
i will take you to museums, and parks, and monuments, and kiss you in every beautiful place, so that you can never go back to them without tasting me like blood in your mouth. i will destroy you in the most beautiful way possible. and when i leave you will finally understand, why storms are named after people.

Calm down John Green

the op’s blog is gone so i assume enough ppl outed them as a plagiarist bc this poem is a beautiful (PUBLISHED) creation by gabriel gadfly:

Do not fall in love with people like me
we will take you to
museums and parks
and monuments
and kiss you in every beautiful
place so that you can
never go back to them
without tasting us
like blood in your mouth

(Source: xemkgx)

Apr 18 '14
the-unpopular-opinions:

There’s a popular post going around Tumblr right now that shows a couple of different LGBT+ members rejecting asexual awareness materials at varying degrees of rudeness. Most (if not all) the comments I’ve seen on this post decry their actions and complain about how maligned asexuals have been in the LGBT movement and how difficult it is to be accepted. 
Now I’m not saying people should be unnecessarily cruel about it, but these comments seem ignorant and short-sighted as to the effects these materials have had on gay, lesbian and bi people especially. Gay folk have been told their entire lives that the sex they wish to partake in is unnatural and disgusting. They’ve been told by the media, religious leaders, parents, and relatives that abstaining from it is one of the only ways to lead a virtuous life, or at least one that is “normal”. As a result, gay folk have had their entire relationships reduced and condemned based on these sexual acts. 
I know it’s not their intentions, but showing up at LGBT+ events to spread the news of the wonders of a sexless relationship seems out of place at best, and reinforces the above at worst. I’m not saying you can’t be happy in a relationship about sex, but to create an identity that divides between “romantics” and “sexuals” (as if gay folk aren’t already reduced to their sexual relationships??), that allows LGB members who are already uncomfortable with their sexuality to further fall back into abstinence, and which tries to teach us how to live in comfortable, sexless relationship without understanding the same homophobic dogma that preaches the exact same thing, isn’t appropriate in these spaces. 
I’m not saying everyone should have sex or should be pressured into wanting it. There are a host of reasons why people don’t and that’s fine. In fact, I’m sure there are just as many gay folk who don’t wish to have a sexual component to their relationship, and I’m not saying people are deluding themselves to think that way. Do whatever you want in your personal lives. But I just don’t see how “asexuality” in and of itself warrants inclusion in LGBT+ spaces, I’m sorry. 

There’s a popular post going around Tumblr right now that rejects  asexual awareness with a lot of rudeness. Most (if not all) the comments I’ve seen on this post commend these opinions and complain about how asexuals have been trying to join in the LGBT movement by creating a space for themselves and how “LGB” people don’t want them there.
Now I’m not saying people have been unnecessarily cruel about it, but these comments seem ignorant and short-sighted as to the effects these comments have had on asexual people. Asexual folk have been told their entire lives that not wanting to have sex is unnatural and abnormal. They’ve been told by the media, doctors, therapists, parents, relatives, and peers that by abstaining from it they will never lead a life that is “normal”. As a result, asexual folk have had their entire relationships reduced and dismissed as meaningless based on lack of sexual acts. 
I know it’s not their intentions, but denying asexuals from showing up at LGBT+ events to spread the knowledge of the capability to have a normal life without a sexual relationship reinforces the above at the very least . No one is saying gay people should be in a relationship without sex, but to deny the queer identity of asexuals (as if the entire world doesn’t already view sexual as the default) encourages those who are already uncomfortable or questioning their normality and doubting their self-worth to think that they are broken. And denying them space removes a possible support network that tries to teach them its ok to not want to be in a sexual relationship and is ignorant of the pressure hyper-sexualized dogma that infects our entire world puts on young or questioning asexuals. This denial mirrors the history of homophobia that we have thankfully started to move past, where the default considered homosexuality to be a mere “sexual deviancy” and a mental disorder. 
I’m not saying every gay person should force themselves into the homophobic stereotype of the “sexless sassy gay friend,” I’m sure everyone can see how that’s disgusting and dated. And I’m not saying you have to LIKE asexuality. But I don’t see how it’s Lesbian and Gay people who have the right to say who is and who isn’t queer. I don’t see how they get to decide who warrant inclusion into a group that is supposed to be for those with “abnormal” sexual identities. I don’t get how you think the most “abnormal” identity most people on this planet can think of ISN’T eligible for “Queer Status,” I’m not sorry.
If we’re not “allowed” inclusion in LGBT+ spaces, why the fuck are allies? And where the fuck else are we supposed to go?

the-unpopular-opinions:

There’s a popular post going around Tumblr right now that shows a couple of different LGBT+ members rejecting asexual awareness materials at varying degrees of rudeness. Most (if not all) the comments I’ve seen on this post decry their actions and complain about how maligned asexuals have been in the LGBT movement and how difficult it is to be accepted. 

Now I’m not saying people should be unnecessarily cruel about it, but these comments seem ignorant and short-sighted as to the effects these materials have had on gay, lesbian and bi people especially. Gay folk have been told their entire lives that the sex they wish to partake in is unnatural and disgusting. They’ve been told by the media, religious leaders, parents, and relatives that abstaining from it is one of the only ways to lead a virtuous life, or at least one that is “normal”. As a result, gay folk have had their entire relationships reduced and condemned based on these sexual acts. 

I know it’s not their intentions, but showing up at LGBT+ events to spread the news of the wonders of a sexless relationship seems out of place at best, and reinforces the above at worst. I’m not saying you can’t be happy in a relationship about sex, but to create an identity that divides between “romantics” and “sexuals” (as if gay folk aren’t already reduced to their sexual relationships??), that allows LGB members who are already uncomfortable with their sexuality to further fall back into abstinence, and which tries to teach us how to live in comfortable, sexless relationship without understanding the same homophobic dogma that preaches the exact same thing, isn’t appropriate in these spaces. 

I’m not saying everyone should have sex or should be pressured into wanting it. There are a host of reasons why people don’t and that’s fine. In fact, I’m sure there are just as many gay folk who don’t wish to have a sexual component to their relationship, and I’m not saying people are deluding themselves to think that way. Do whatever you want in your personal lives. But I just don’t see how “asexuality” in and of itself warrants inclusion in LGBT+ spaces, I’m sorry. 

There’s a popular post going around Tumblr right now that rejects  asexual awareness with a lot of rudeness. Most (if not all) the comments I’ve seen on this post commend these opinions and complain about how asexuals have been trying to join in the LGBT movement by creating a space for themselves and how “LGB” people don’t want them there.

Now I’m not saying people have been unnecessarily cruel about it, but these comments seem ignorant and short-sighted as to the effects these comments have had on asexual people. Asexual folk have been told their entire lives that not wanting to have sex is unnatural and abnormal. They’ve been told by the media, doctors, therapists, parents, relatives, and peers that by abstaining from it they will never lead a life that is “normal”. As a result, asexual folk have had their entire relationships reduced and dismissed as meaningless based on lack of sexual acts. 

I know it’s not their intentions, but denying asexuals from showing up at LGBT+ events to spread the knowledge of the capability to have a normal life without a sexual relationship reinforces the above at the very least . No one is saying gay people should be in a relationship without sex, but to deny the queer identity of asexuals (as if the entire world doesn’t already view sexual as the default) encourages those who are already uncomfortable or questioning their normality and doubting their self-worth to think that they are broken. And denying them space removes a possible support network that tries to teach them its ok to not want to be in a sexual relationship and is ignorant of the pressure hyper-sexualized dogma that infects our entire world puts on young or questioning asexuals. This denial mirrors the history of homophobia that we have thankfully started to move past, where the default considered homosexuality to be a mere “sexual deviancy” and a mental disorder.

I’m not saying every gay person should force themselves into the homophobic stereotype of the “sexless sassy gay friend,” I’m sure everyone can see how that’s disgusting and dated. And I’m not saying you have to LIKE asexuality. But I don’t see how it’s Lesbian and Gay people who have the right to say who is and who isn’t queer. I don’t see how they get to decide who warrant inclusion into a group that is supposed to be for those with “abnormal” sexual identities. I don’t get how you think the most “abnormal” identity most people on this planet can think of ISN’T eligible for “Queer Status,” I’m not sorry.

If we’re not “allowed” inclusion in LGBT+ spaces, why the fuck are allies? And where the fuck else are we supposed to go?

Apr 18 '14

chickenyaoi:

straight boys don’t shut their mouths because their lips would be touching and that’s gay

Apr 18 '14

bigbardafree:

sometimes going into the tags is a lot like reading youtube comments

"The LGBT community is a safe and welcoming environment!"

"Everyone should be free to love who they want! (as long as they have sex with them)"

"Tumblr is such a safe space UwU"

"Wow, straight people are the least accepting people ever. We’re so much better than them"

Apr 18 '14

(Source: dailysets)

Apr 18 '14

basedgosh:

i stopped studying because of this

Apr 18 '14
"

I’m in love with you,” he said quietly.

"Augustus," I said.

"I am," he said. He was staring at me, and I could see the corners of his eyes crinkling. "I’m in love with you, and I’m not in the business of denying myself the simple pleasure of saying true things. I’m in love with you, and I know that love is just a shout into the void, and that oblivion is inevitable, and that we’re all doomed and that there will come a day when all our labor has been returned to dust, and I know the sun will swallow the only earth we’ll ever have, and I am in love with you.

"

John GreenThe Fault in Our Stars (via dissapolnted)

What do ppl see in this book and this man like this is the most pretentious dribble I don’t understand help me understaaaaand

who the fuck actually talks like this 

literally if someone said this to me i’d hit them with a brick and leave

Augustus sounds like one of those very old bank managers

(via sparknorth)

He likes to talk about how his books are great because the teenagers actually act like teenagers. Uh… what?

(via huntokar)

I’m imagining this scene in my head and I have no idea what these people look like but the dude is very clearly wearing a fedora.

(via inbetweenthelineart)

(Source: feellng)

Apr 18 '14
tyleroakley:

entropiaorganizada:

hookteeth:

… Y’see, now, y’see, I’m looking at this, thinking, squares fit together better than circles, so, say, if you wanted a box of donuts, a full box, you could probably fit more square donuts in than circle donuts if the circumference of the circle touched the each of the corners of the square donut.
So you might end up with more donuts.
But then I also think… Does the square or round donut have a greater donut volume? Is the number of donuts better than the entire donut mass as a whole?
Hrm.
HRM.

A round donut with radius R1 occupies the same space as a square donut with side 2R1. If the center circle of a round donut has a radius R2 and the hole of a square donut has a side 2R2, then the area of a round donut is πR12 - πr22. The area of a square donut would be then 4R12 - 4R22. This doesn’t say much, but in general and  throwing numbers, a full box of square donuts has more donut per donut than a full box of round donuts.The interesting thing is knowing exactly how much more donut per donut we have. Assuming first a small center hole (R2 = R1/4) and replacing in the proper expressions, we have a 27,6% more donut in the square one (Round: 15πR12/16 ≃ 2,94R12, square: 15R12/4 = 3,75R12). Now, assuming a large center hole (R2 = 3R1/4) we have a 27,7% more donut in the square one (Round: 7πR12/16 ≃ 1,37R12, square: 7R12/4 = 1,75R12). This tells us that, approximately, we’ll have a 27% bigger donut if it’s square than if it’s round.
tl;dr: Square donuts have a 27% more donut per donut in the same space as a round one.

Thank you donut side of Tumblr.

tyleroakley:

entropiaorganizada:

hookteeth:

… Y’see, now, y’see, I’m looking at this, thinking, squares fit together better than circles, so, say, if you wanted a box of donuts, a full box, you could probably fit more square donuts in than circle donuts if the circumference of the circle touched the each of the corners of the square donut.

So you might end up with more donuts.

But then I also think… Does the square or round donut have a greater donut volume? Is the number of donuts better than the entire donut mass as a whole?

Hrm.

HRM.

A round donut with radius R1 occupies the same space as a square donut with side 2R1. If the center circle of a round donut has a radius R2 and the hole of a square donut has a side 2R2, then the area of a round donut is πR12 - πr22. The area of a square donut would be then 4R12 - 4R22. This doesn’t say much, but in general and  throwing numbers, a full box of square donuts has more donut per donut than a full box of round donuts.

The interesting thing is knowing exactly how much more donut per donut we have. Assuming first a small center hole (
R2 = R1/4) and replacing in the proper expressions, we have a 27,6% more donut in the square one (Round: 15πR12/16 ≃ 2,94R12, square: 15R12/4 = 3,75R12). Now, assuming a large center hole (R2 = 3R1/4) we have a 27,7% more donut in the square one (Round: 7πR12/16 ≃ 1,37R12, square: 7R12/4 = 1,75R12). This tells us that, approximately, we’ll have a 27% bigger donut if it’s square than if it’s round.


tl;dr: Square donuts have a 27% more donut per donut in the same space as a round one.

Thank you donut side of Tumblr.

(Source: nimstrz)

Apr 18 '14

queerlilyevans:

There’s the characters you headcanon as queer and then there’s the characters where nope they are 100% actually queer it’s not up for question, it’s really a shame the creators never figured it out.

Apr 18 '14

the-tie-guy:

iamtravellingwiththedoctor:

thekrustykr4b:

who needs punk rock when you can have punk cock

image

that could have been a very different picture

I am glad it wasn’t

(Source: spicy-vagina-tacos)

Apr 18 '14

frantzfandom:

if you’re a grown ass man and you look at a sixteen year old girl as anything but a child the problem is with you, not with what she’s wearing

Apr 18 '14

theboywhofangirled:

Idk I think feminism should be called something different like common sense or something

(Source: kimpossibooty)

Apr 18 '14

nentindo:

kidshade:

ediebrit:

IM FUCKING SCREAMING

IM IN FUCKING STITCHES 

image

image

image

image

image

the only thing funnier than this video are the comments on it

Apr 18 '14

gottliebz:

Numbers do not lie. Politics and poetry, promises, these are lies. Numbers are as close as we get to the handwriting of god.

Apr 18 '14

worried-about:

So apparently, 4 out of ten people actually saw the movies selected in the best animated picture, and even people who saw a few went so far as to say that they considered it to be childish, minor, or not worthy of their interest (paraphrasing this article). It was then only logical then that the voters would vote for the good ol’ christmas pop-corn that it Frozen. 

As animators and directors, we are used to this kind of reactions around us from people who don’t have so much of a passion for cinema. But this is the academy ! These guys make our movies, they are supposed to have enough culture and curiosity to know that animation is not only about children - especially the year with The wind rises and Ernest & Célestine in competition.

Sorry the blame has to fall on Frozen, it’s a good movie and it deserves its best original song award, but in my opinion the best animated picture award is a robbery.